IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF CIVIL ACTION 

PHILADELPHIA, 

 Plaintiff 

v. 

DENNIS CARLSON & JOSEPHINE CARLSON, NO. 05- 

Parents of E.C., 

 Defendants 

COMPLAINT

1. Plaintiff The School District of Philadelphia (“School District”) is an 

independent home rule school district of the first class established by the City of 

Philadelphia Home Rule Charter, with its Administrative offices at 440 North Broad 

Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19130. 

2. Defendants Dennis Carlson and Josephine Carlson (“Parents”) are the parents 

of E.C., (”Student”), a student residing in the School District and in the Eastern District 

of Pennsylvania. 

3. Jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. §1331 and the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. §1415(i) (3), which 

authorizes the District courts to review the final decision of the State educational agency, 

regardless of the amount in controversy. 
4. The student is 17 years old and is eligible for special education as a child who 

has mild mental retardation and attention deficit disorder. 

5. The student was placed at The Pathway School, an approved private school, 

for the 2002-2003 school year. 

6. By Agreement between the School District and the Parents reached at a Due 

Process Hearing on June 17, 2003, the Student was placed at The Pathway School for the 

school year 2003-2004, with the School District paying the tuition and fees for both 

school years. 

7. On May 7, 2004, the School District developed an Individual Education Plan 

(“IEP”) for the Student for the 2004-2005 school year, which offered an appropriate 

placement in the Life Skills Support program at Swenson Arts & Technical School in the 

School District. 

8. The Parents rejected the 2004-2005 IEP because they believed that the 

program was inappropriate for E.C. 

9. The Parents continued the student’s enrollment at The Pathway School for the 

2004-2005 school year and requested tuition reimbursement and fees for the 2004-2005 

school year. 

10. The School District declined to reimburse the Parents for private school 

tuition and fees for the 2004-2005 school year. 

11. The Parents requested a Due Process Hearing, which took place in four 

sessions, ending on June 15, 2005. 

2
12. On July 22, 2005, the Hearing Officer Linda M. Valenti entered her Decision 

and Order that the School District offered the Student a free appropriate public education 

(“FAPE”) for the 2004-2005 school year and that the Parents are not due tuition 

reimbursement for the Student’s 2004-2005 school year at The Pathway School. A true 

copy of the Decision and Order of the Hearing Officer in ODR Case #4924/04-05-KK is 

attached hereto for reference only as Exhibit “A.” 

13. The Parents appealed the Decision and Order of the Hearing Officer to the 

Special Education Due Process Appeals Panel Review. 

14. On September 10, 2005, the Appeals Panel reversed the Decision and Order 

of the Hearing Officer, ruling that the School District’s 2004-2005 IEP was inappropriate 

and that the Parents are entitled to tuition reimbursement for the Student’s 2004-2005 

school year placement at The Pathway School. A true copy of the Decision and Order of 

the Appeals Panel, Special Education Opinion No. 1641, is attached hereto for reference 

only as Exhibit “B.” 

15. The Decision of the Appeals Panel is final for purposes of judicial review and 

adversely affects the School District. 

16. The School District of Philadelphia has exhausted all administrative remedies 

prior to filing this action. 

17. The Appeals Panel erred in its Decision that The District failed to offer 

student “FAPE” because the IEP was insufficient in its failure to delineate an appropriate 

transition plan.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff The School District of Philadelphia requests that the 

Court receive the records of the administrative proceedings and any additional evidence 

3
and, after review of the record, reverse the decision of the Appeals Panel and declare that 

the School District provided E.C. with a free appropriate public education for the 2004-

2005 school year and grant such other relief against the defendants as the Court 

determines is appropriate, including reasonable attorney’s fees of the School District for 

this civil action. 

 s/Miles H. Shore 

 Miles H. Shore 

 Pa. I.D. 03274 

 C. Reginald Johnson 

 Pa. I.D. 61115 

 School District of Philadelphia 

 Office of General Counsel 

 440 North Broad Street 

 3rd Floor 

 Philadelphia, PA 19130 

 (215) 400-4120 

 (215) 400-4121 (Fax) 

 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

4